Global Research: The Coming war against Iran

Coming war against Iran: Increasing
Anglo-American pressure on Turkey

Covering the period
of March-June 2008, this article will try to highlight the
political pressure applied by the US and UK governments on
Turkey in view of their war plans against Iran. It is
complementary to an earlier article titled "Will Turkey be
Complicit in Another War Against Another Neighbour?"
[1]

"[The Middle East] is capable of a very bright
future:… a place of innovation and discovery, driven by
free men and women. In recent years, we've seen hopeful
beginnings toward this vision. Turkey, a nation with a
majority Muslim population, is a prosperous modern
democracy. Afghanistan under the leadership of President
Karzai is overcoming the Taliban and building a free
society. Iraq under the leadership of Prime Minister Maliki
is establishing a multi-ethnic democracy." -- US President
George W. Bush (World Economic Forum, Sharm el Sheikh, 18
May 2008) [2]

Turkey was the last stop of US Vice
President Dick Cheney's tour in the Middle East in March.
Coverage of the event by the Turkish press gave the
impression that Mr Cheney did not make any demands from
Turkey's President, Prime Minister or Chief of General
Staff, concerning the US foreign policy in the Middle East
and/or Afghanistan. Given the increasingly evident
Anglo-American hostility against Iran on all fronts, this
wasn't very plausible. In fact, all the evidence since then
suggests otherwise.

Shortly after Mr Cheney's visit, the
US-based RAND Corporation published a report on the
US-Turkish relations:

"Given its growing equities in the
Middle East, as well as the current strains in U.S.-Turkish
relations, Turkey will be even more reluc-tant to allow the
United States to use its bases in the future, particu-larly
the [U.S.] airbase at Incirlik, to undertake combat
operations in the Middle East… Turkey is unlikely to
support U.S. policies aimed at isolating Iran and Syria or
overthrowing the regimes in either country." [3]

Frequent
visits by senior US officials continued after Mr Cheney. In
April, US Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) Gregory Schulte commented on Iran's Shahab-3
ballistic missile:

"Shahab-3 could strike most of Turkey
and the Middle East, and the longer-range missiles would
reach deeper into Europe." [4]

The following month, in a
conference held in Washington, Ambassador of Turkey to the
US Nabi Sensoy echoed Mr Schulte:

"Iran has run
'clandestine (nuclear) programs for more than two decades,'
and those programs are 'a threat to Turkey as well as to the
U.S.' " [5]

QUEEN ELIZABETH'S IMPERIAL VISIT

In a
press conference with his Turkish counterpart Ali Babacan in
April in London, UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband
said:

"Bilateral relations are deep, excellent and
sincerely felt… Turkey had a pivotal role to play on
regional issues, such as the conflict in Iraq and concern
over Iran's nuclear programme." [6]

The following month,
Queen Elizabeth II and Mr Miliband held a state visit to
Turkey. On May 13, she gave a speech at the state banquet in
Ankara:

"For us, Turkey is as important now as it has ever
been... Abroad, Turkey is uniquely positioned as a bridge
between East and West at a crucial time for the European
Union and the world in general... [Mr President Abdullah
Gul], you are playing a key role in promoting peace,
political stability and economic development in some of the
world's most unsettled areas." [7]

Both statements were
eerily reminiscent of Tony Blair's speech three months
before officially launching the ultimate invasion on
Iraq:

"I think this is a very important and exciting
moment for the European Union and for Turkey and I believe
we have an historic opportunity to send the clearest
possible signal that the European Union wants Turkey inside
the European family as a full partner." [8]

Yet again,
according to the Turkish and international media, this was
just a friendly visit by the Queen which had no agenda other
than supporting Turkey's accession to the European Union.
Listening to a Quran recital with her head covered in a
mosque located in Bursa (which is the first capital of the
Ottoman Empire), moved even those who are otherwise deeply
anti-religious.

Equally symbolic, but more revealing was
the reception she held for Turkish President Abdullah Gul
[9] on board of a Royal Navy aircraft carrier in Istanbul
[10]. In fact, HMS Illustrious was on its way back from the
'Operation Orion 08', which was a multi-national naval
exercise conducted in the Persian Gulf to rehearse a
possible war on Iran. [11] [12]

Back in October 2007,
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his British
counterpart Mr Gordon Brown had signed the 'Turkey-UK
Strategic Partnership Agreement'. The following items on
this document reveal the striking similarity between the UK
and US foreign policy on Turkey:

"Enhanced
co-operation on the terrorist threat posed by PKK,
…Al-Qaida and other associated extremist groups."

"Support for the UN Security Council process on Iran,
including for full implementation of any measures
imposed."

"Further co-operation between the UK and
Turkish armed forces and mutual support in NATO fora."

"Co-operation… to ensure that NATO can fully implement
the deliverables agreed at the 2006 Riga Summit."
[13]

It is also important to remember what the
UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband, who is widely
considered as the successor to Mr Brown, said on the fifth
anniversary of invasion of Iraq in March 2003:

"I think
the war itself was a remarkable victory. It went better than
most people expected." [14]

The following statement a
month earlier makes his stance on prospective Anglo-American
wars crystal clear:

"I believe discussion about the Iraq
war has clouded the debate about promoting democracy around
the world. I understand the doubts about Iraq and
Afghanistan, and the deep concerns at the mistakes made. But
my plea is that we do not let divisions over those conflicts
obscure our national interest, never mind our moral impulse,
in supporting movements for democracy… In the 1990's …
the left seemed conflicted between the desirability of the
goal and its qualms about the use of military means. In
fact, the goal of spreading democracy should be a great
progressive project; the means need to combine soft and hard
power." [15]

US PRESSURE SHIFTING INTO HIGH
GEAR

In early June, 'The U.S.-Turkey Agreement for
Cooperation Concerning Peaceful Uses' came into
force:

"The Agreement provides a comprehensive framework
for peaceful nuclear cooperation between the United States
and Turkey under agreed non-proliferation conditions and
controls." [16]

On June 5, The White House announced the
nomination of the Deputy National Security Advisor James
Franklin Jeffrey as US Ambassador to Turkey. In his earlier
capacity as the principal deputy assistant secretary of
state for Near Eastern Affairs, Mr Jeffrey had a prominent
role on Iraq policy and was co-chairing the now defunct
Iran-Syria Policy and Operations Group [17]:

"The infamous
Iran-Syria Policy and Operations Group (ISOG) created in
early 2006, integrated by officials from the White House,
the [US] State Department, the CIA and the Treasury
Department, had a mandate to destabilize Syria and Iran, and
bring about 'Regime Change'. " [18]

The same day, during
his visit to the US, which also included his participation
to the Bilderberg Meeting (for the fifth time [19] ),
Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan held a press conference
with his US counterpart Condaleezza Rice:

"Question:
Madame Secretary, what do you expect Turkey to do --
increase pressure on Iran beyond the UN sanctions?

Rice:
All member states have an obligation to carry out the terms
of those resolutions and to use whatever offices they have
with the Iranians to insist that the Iranians carry out the
obligations that the UN Security Council has
imposed.

Babacan: Turkey is implementing the relevant
United Nations Security Council resolutions. As long as the
international community has one unified stance, Turkey
[would also be] implementing those decisions." [20]

Again
on the same day, back in Turkey, the Chief of General Staff
of the Turkish Armed Forces Yasar Buyukanit's opening speech
at an international symposium in Istanbul, titled "The
Middle East: Its Uncertain Future and Security Problems",
was even more straightforward:

"Until mid-2003, Iran has
built nuclear installations and conducted uranium enrichment
work secretly from the International Atomic Agency (IAEA).
It approved inspections by the IAEA, but didn't implement
this through a constitutional process. Iran needs to inspire
trust that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes
entirely. Iran's adoption of sensible policies, which will
prevent new problems arising in the region, is very
important in terms of restoring a peaceful and stable Middle
East." [21]

However, Mr Buyukanit was not forthcoming when
asked a question about a recent press report on Turkish
Armed Forces' plans to extend the scope of "Irregular
Warfare Units", which function as a "counter-guerrilla"
force. The report reveals "highly secret preparations on
covert struggle methods to be used in an operation which
will be conducted together with our armed forces in the
event of a violation of our country's territorial integrity
by an enemy force". [22] Mr Buyukanit replied:

"This is a
very old concept from the Cold War Era which is no longer
valid: If, within the context of NATO-Warsaw Pact, Turkey
were to be invaded by the Soviets, then there would be
resistance in occupied areas. This is over, we currently
don't have such structure as there is no need for it. In
fact, who would invade Turkey?" [23]

Despite the evasive
language, it is clear that Mr Buyukanit is referring to
Article V of the NATO Charter, [24] which states that the
members of the Alliance must consider coming to the aid of
an ally under attack. According to the RAND Corporation
report cited earlier:

"Turkey is the only NATO member that
faces the threat of outside attack (Iran, Syria). It is thus
very concerned that Article 5 (collective defense) remains a
core Alliance mission and that emphasis on crisis management
[does] not weaken the Alliance's commitment to collective
defense." [3]

Whether Article V will be resorted as a
justification for war is yet to be seen... Another RAND
Corporation report released as early as 1992 reveals how old
and consistent such propaganda is:

"The [1991] Gulf war
and its aftermath have simply confirmed and re-inforced
emerging perceptions about the regional ambitions and
ex-panding arsenals across Turkey's borders, not least the
growing threat from weapons of mass destruction... The
prospect of a revived Iraq posing a conventional and
unconven-tional threat to Turkey is an obvious source of
concern in light of Turkey's prominent role in the coalition
against Baghdad… Above all, Turkey faces longer-term
security risks from Iran, with its competing aims in
Azerbaijan and active interest in nuclear and bal-listic
missile technology, and Syria… The United States, both
bilaterally and through its role in NATO, will remain the
best guarantor of Turkish security in relation to the most
dangerous risks facing Turkey over the longer term…"
[25]

On June 17, Turkish daily Hurriyet reported the
following exchange:

"Recently [outgoing] U.S. Ambassador
to Turkey Ross Wilson visited the Turkish Minister of Energy
[Hilmi Guler] asking him to discontinue the energy projects
with Iran. The Minister of Energy rejected the request on
the basis of a lack of an alternative source When Wilson
suggested buying energy from Iraq, the Turkish minister
expressed his pessimistic opinion about Iraq being an
alternative, indicating that Iraq had no gas reserves. He
said, 'A bird in the hand is better than two birds on a
tree.' In response, Ambassador Wilson stated 'in a short
time, the bird may burn with the branch it is sitting on' "
[26]

Two days later, in an interview with the Turkish
daily Aksam, Israel's Ambassador to Turkey Gabby Levy
claimed that Iran's weapons is a threat to the entire Middle
East. [27]

On the other hand, in another recent interview
with the same newspaper, US Congressman Mark Kirk presented
a different strand of disinformation which aims to comfort
an ever more anxious and sceptical public in Turkey. He
argued that since the rejection of the March 2003
parliamentary motion (allowing US troops to use Turkish soil
to invade Iraq), Turkey's significance has decreased by 90%.
When asked what the US would expect from Turkey in the event
of an attack on Iran, he said:

"The US would expect Turkey
not to interfere with anything. Just like Belgium."
[28]

Meanwhile, a US-sponsored political engineering
process has entered its last phase, warning the entire
political spectrum in Turkey to toe the line. It is
relentlessly trying to ensure that a fully compliant
government is in power before launching the next
Anglo-American war on Iran and possibly on
Syria.

The CRG grants permission to cross-post
original Global Research articles on community internet
sites as long as the text &title are not modified. The
source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For
publication of Global Research articles in print or other
forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com

www.globalresearch.ca contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been
specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are
making such material available to our readers under the
provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better
understanding of political, economic and social issues. The
material on this site is distributed without profit to those
who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for
research and educational purposes. If you wish to use
copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you
must request permission from the copyright
owner.

This is an opportunity for you as one of the 4 million potential funders and recipients of a Universal Basic Income to collectively consider the issue:1. Is UBI is a desirable policy for New Zealand; and2. How should a UBI system work in practice. More>>

The National party has announced its youth justice policy, which includes a controversial plan for recidivist serious youth offenders to be hit over the head with a comically large rubber mallet. More>>

ALSO:

It's been brought to my attention that Labour's new campaign slogan is "Let's do this". A collective call to action. A mission. I myself was halfway out of the couch before I realised I wasn't sure what it was I was supposed to do. More>>

ALSO:

Ordinary citizens have had very few venues where they can debate and discuss as to what they believe has led to the crisis in affordable housing and how we might begin to address this. The HiveMind on affordable housing was about redressing the balance. More>>

ALSO:

This is an opportunity for you as one of the 4 million guardians of our common water resources to help us find mutually agreeable solutions to the critical task of collectively managing these resources for health and sustainability. More>>